You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

RichardKennaway comments on 2014 Less Wrong Census/Survey - Call For Critiques/Questions - Less Wrong Discussion

18 Post author: Yvain 11 October 2014 06:39AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (269)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 11 October 2014 10:55:23PM 2 points [-]

I'm unclear on the distinction between "sexual orientation" and "romantic orientation". I can understand the distinction between "sex" and "romance", but the two are strongly connected to each other. Are there people who want sex with one gender, but romance (whatever that means without sex) with the other? The Wikipedia article, um, isn't helping me.

Comment author: philh 12 October 2014 01:11:19AM 2 points [-]

My impression is that a person's romantic orientation is almost always a sub- or superset of their sexual orientation. At any rate I don't recall hearing of anyone who identified otherwise. But the inclusion can go either way (e.g. asexual but homororomantic, or bisexual but heteroromantic). They're strongly correlated but distinct.

Comment author: DanielFilan 12 October 2014 01:31:08AM 3 points [-]

There are also non-asexual people who are a- or demi-romantic.